Fetish Friday: Findom – More Than Erotic Shark Art

Welcome to another Fetish Friday here on Lawyers & Liquor, where we talk about the legal issues that may surround anything sex, kink, or otherwise erotically related! I’m your Dungeon Master, the Boozy Barrister, and I don’t mean that in the “Roll D20” way unless we’re defining “D” in a completely different, and this month we’re going to go down the slippery slope of a draining bank account and a throbbing erection as we talk about the legal pitfalls of a very specific kink – Financial Domination.

Speaking of which, you can become one of the Lawyers & Liquor supporters in a variety of means, all of which are going to be in nice italics at the end of this week’s article, but if you go over to Patreon you can become one of those who get their names on our list of Patreon supporters on the website itself, found here! If you want to be even fancier, or have something to sell yourself, I’m happy to announce that as part of my neverending march towards selling the fuck out you can, at the $15.00 or above patreon level, get whatever project you currently have going on listed on our “Special Advertisers” page starting shortly – meaning I’m literally selling ad space I’ll pimp in every post.

Appropriate post to announce that shit on, eh?

Am I done selling out? Oh good. Now, let’s get this ball of debt a-rolling as we tell me what a bad boy I am and make me drain my bank account with this month’s discussion of Financial Domination.

I’m Not Your Dom.

We gotta be really clear because you need to understand that while I’m a lawyer, I’m in no way your lawyer unless you’ve slid into my office, agreed to become my little retainer-based pay pig, and signed an engagement letter to that effect after I’ve explicitly agreed to accept your case. Lawyers & Liquor is a website focused on the discussion of legal issues, concepts, cases, and practice in an informative and obscene manner, and is provided solely for entertainment and educational value. Nothing in here is legal advice, nor does it create an attorney-client relationship, and you damn well better understand that by now. Normally I’d say “you have to pay me before I represent you,” but I’m really aware of today’s topic and the chance that may happen, so we’re going to shy away from such statements because there’s a chance you may fucking actually pay me.

So, you know, just keep in mind: I am a lawyer, but I am not your lawyer unless we have explicitly agreed to this. Consent is key, assholes, even if you’re wearing a ball gag.

Now, without further adieu, allow me to introduce our convenient strawperson questioner for this month’s article – Paul the Paypig.

Oh, Make Me Guaranty Your Loans Boozy Daddy.

Stop it, Paul. We’re not that close.

Okay, Sorry. So, What Exactly is “Financial Domination?”

According to the website Kinkly.com, which I assume is like Etsy but for buttplugs, Financial Domination is a primarily sexual fetish where people get their Rockefellers off by paying for shit. And I mean paying for shit, not just buying dinner off the dollar menu at your local fast food joint in a sad approximation of the worst junior high date ever. It’s essentially a fetish built around the idea of being financially subservient to another person, paying money upon demand and, in some cases, giving them complete financial control over you and your – many times – significant assets. In other words, it’s a case where money, and the ceding of control over the same to another person, buys, if not happiness, the ejaculatory analogy of the same.

Now, I know what you’re thinking: this sounds a lot like the World’s Oldest Profession, to be euphemistically appropriate and prevent the possible offense of others who may read a site where we regularly classify folks as “dipshits.” You’d be wrong, though, because while financial domination may involve making the broke-ass beast with two backs after the forking off of the deed to your property to someone that calls themselves Mistress (or Master. We’re equal opportunity here in Boozy’s Fuck Dungeon), it does not necessarily include the same. The sexual gratification and eroticism in this specific kink isn’t in the fucking, but rather the financing. It’s an entire kink built around sacrificing the ability to control your own financial decision making to another person and becoming amazingly subservient in regards to the same for the sake of an erection.

So sort of like investing in the housing market pre-2008, but with a lot less fucking in the aftermath and a lot more satisfaction.

Wait. There’s an Entire Kink Built Around Giving People All of My Money For The Purposes of Humiliation and Subservience?

Right? I assume they got the idea from studying the law school business model.

Every lawyer in the world right now is cringing a little bit at this concept, but not too much, because on the surface it sounds like the sort of situation a person can easily extricate themselves from, right? Like, if it becomes too much you can just say “No” when you’re sent a request from the dom half of the Findom equation and keep your cash in the bank account. In that way, it’s more of a kinkplay situation, where the parties are actually equals who relent control only on the concept of consent and fully able to move apart or refuse at any time without negative consequences that are real and unavoidable. And, you know, in a perfect world that’s how that shit would work: an exchange of assets between two people who are really on equal footing but prefer the illusion of subservience because it gets their rocks off.

But to assume so would be ignoring a few key points:

  1. People who do things for sexual gratification of any sort tend to include people that place the value of their sexual gratification ahead of their own goddamn common sense;
  2. Where there be money, there be an opportunity for abuse, and;
  3. The internet has this weird habit of making a bunch of shit really, really risky.

See, the general Findom relationship isn’t “I need money, buy me things and you can’t say no.” That’s more akin to the whole “sugardaddy/sugarmomma” sort of thing, which is a whole different thing in and of itself. Findom is more…alright, let me see if I can explain it in terms that even a non-financially subservient person like myself could understand had I not spent far too long on the internet reading about this shit over the past week or so.

You know how you like to go to haunted houses in the fall and get chased by that motherfucker with the chainsaw? You know how, at some base level, while it is thrilling you’re absolutely aware you’re not in any real danger because the guy with the chainsaw is named Hank and is actually a high school teacher who really likes doing this shit once a year, and the chainsaw is sans chain so it’s really just a loud noise machine that isn’t dangerous unless Hank has a flashback to last year’s senior prank and just starts bludgeoning the shit out of you with it? But even though you know there’s no risk, the context gives you a thrill, and you get to scream and laugh and know that the whole time if you start crying or panicking Hank will probably calm the fuck down and assist you to the nearest exit?

Cool. So, that’s the whole sugarbaby thing. It’s Hank with the chainsaw. The thrill is there, but at any time you know you can say no, sever the fucking contact, and walk the hell away maybe out the price of admission but not in any true danger.

Now imagine the only way you’re getting the thrill is if Hank is a former high school teacher who may or may not have a severe bloodlust, and the chainsaw definitely has some goddamn teeth on it as Hank chases your ass through the forest at night miles in the woods. Sure, Hank may catch up with you and say “Man, great chase, let’s go get some coffee!” Or Hank may hack your fucking head off and take it home to make a mask. And the uncertainty of that physical safety is what gives you the thrill – the absence of risk just simply doesn’t do it for you, only the complete surrendering of control gets the Black and Decker humming if you get the drift.

At least, that’s my understanding. I could be wrong. Because I don’t even pay for porn and I’m sure as hell not giving anyone my bank account information so I can get off.

At The End of the Day, It’s All Fantasy. How Is That Bad?

The concept of financial domination isn’t necessarily bad, nor is the kink of it. Look, I don’t give two runny shits on a Sunday morning sidewalk what you do with the hard earned money you have. You want to buy an ice cream cone? Cool. You want to be told by Mistress Madeline to give her all the money in your bank account so she can buy ice cream cones that she wants to watch melt while denying you the pleasure of ever enjoying just one lick? That’s fine by me, too. Because at the end of the day, you’re both adults and everyone involved is, in theory, capable of walking their ass away. It’s like the more “vanilla” forms of kinks: If you don’t like Daddy Darrell financially spanking you, you can take your metaphorical leather paddle and waltz, bare-assed, down the street.

Every kink of this nature is built on some type of trust and understanding between the relative parties to it, even if those parties are involved in a kink that is ostensibly based around the lack of power. So, that’s fine by me. And why, you may ask?

Because of Boozy’s Big Three “Give A Fuck” Factors!

I’ll bite. What are Boozy’s Big Three “Give A Fuck” Factors?

It’s been a while, I understand, you may have forgotten my general opinion on fetishes/kinks/whatever makes your dick get hard and/or a tsunami rage beneath your leather skirt (skirt appropriate for parties of any or no gender, as you will see). Generally, though, these are the three factors I use to determine whether or not a kink or fetish really matters to me in a “I care about this” manner. Because, end of the day, people are people and it takes all types to make this great big ball of blue circle move through the universe, and it ain’t my place to say shit about most of what people do in their own lives if it doesn’t affect mine.

They are:

  1. Is it illegal? Are there any laws, and by this we mean the laws of man, being violated in the performance of an act? Now, granted, a lot of shit isn’t legal that may get your rocks off, but I tend to err on the side of legality on whether or not I should care because a lot of times we have laws in place for good reason. But even I will admit, sometimes this is a malleable factor, which is why the “Give A Fuck Factors” are a factoring test and not a dispositive one;
  2. Is anyone/any living thing being hurt or likely to be hurt? Keep in mind, I’m not talking about some bruising from consensual flogging, but rather is there some form of life-altering harm that takes place, whether or not the activity at issue is completely legal. Sorry, I just can’t get behind demanding a subservient person cut off a limb so you can go hog wild on the stump.
  3. Can everyone participating consent, and have they consented? Consent is king, motherfucker. This is probably the most heavily weighted factor in my give a fuck test, though again not a dispositive one. If everyone involved can consent to the activity (and we’re defining consent as the mental ability to clearly understand what is happening, the consequences thereof, verbalize consent in the spoken word) and does so, I feel my right to “give a fuck” is pretty goddamn low. The consequences in many of those cases are, indeed, on your sex-sweat covered head.

If the answers to those three questions are relatively “No,” “No,” and “Yes,” then, frankly folks, I don’t give a good goddamn what you do in your bedroom outside of wanting to make sure you do it safely and are well-aware of the potential legal risks of undertaking such action.

Aren’t you lucky, you got two disclaimers in one article. Hip-fucking-hooray.

So Does This Strange New Definition of “Wage Slavery” Register on the Give A Fuck Scale?

…sometimes?

See, I briefly said that financial domination is more than a “sugarbaby” sort of relationship, where the giving of money, gifts, or support are voluntary and understood on both sides as being more akin to a little bratty kid screaming for a buck for ice cream and the parent, who has definitely named that kid something after some mineral and they’ve spelled it strangely and refer to them as an “old soul” who “needs the freedom to express themselves”, acquiescing. That’s not the case in financial domination. The name of the kink is not “the redistribution of money and resources between two co-equals” but rather domination.

And, as we’ve discussed multiple times in the past, in any good domination style relationship there is an understanding on the part of both parties – both the dominator and the “lowly goddamn worm that’s right you piece of shit shine my boot with your tongue” – that at the end of the day the power differential is based on consent. Further, there is the understanding that at the end of the day both parties are, indeed, humans and deserving of the rights and dignity thereof. And that’s true in the whole financial domination scene as well to an extent.

One person I spoke with, for example, is involved in such an arrangement and candidly admits that they are fucking horrible with money and has almost been foreclosed on in the past as a result of the same. Their dominating party, in addition to adding the kink into the whole thing, actually controls their finances in a manner akin to a financial consultant sometimes – making sure that the guy’s mortgage and bills get paid and there is a reasonable amount for him to live on afterwards by way of an allowance. While the domination party – who I spoke with as well – does get shit for themselves, the overage is placed in accounts and investments for their little dollar slave to protect their financial future, with the understanding that if the relationship were to terminate those accounts would be released back to them.

Which is…I mean…the weirdest goddamn alternative to a spendthrift trust I’ve ever heard of, but okay. My accountant doesn’t step on my balls when scolding me about my spending habits. Just saying. Of course, my accountant is also and elderly and obese dude name Levi sooooo…

In those situations – where there is a level of basic human concern and care for the financial well-being that is understood and the parties all accept that fantasy should never render someone homeless, this kink doesn’t really register on my “give a fuck” scale. But that hinges on the person who, by necessity of the definition of a domination based kink, has the perception of control understanding and respecting those limits and having a genuine concern for the well-being of their submissive in these instances. Which is what makes me really worried because, in years of legal practice, I’ve learned such respect, while in existence, is easily abused. Plus there are things about the financial domination kink, and the placing of oneself in the position of financial servitude, which worries me.

But then again, I have like $120,000 in student loan debt, so this could be the pot calling the kettle black.

Great Lakes, much like Levi, does not step on my balls when I make a monthly payment.

What Concerns Do You Have, Man?

First, there’s the whole “powerless” and “completely subservient” part of the kink. For some, though not all, of the people involved in this lifestyle, the concept of powerlessness and being a true “paypig” (sidenote: yes, that’s the term they use. Paypig. Give me a second, I’m contacting the Chapter 13 Trustee to see how we can propose switching the word “Debtor” with that in their system) means that you have almost no choice – at least in the realm of the fantasy – but to obey the demands of your master/mistress in regards to financial matters. It’s that loss of control and need to obey that gets the rocks off.

Which means you need to place yourself in a position of such compliance in order to get the full effect. Which often ends with people opening joint accounts or transferring property to their money mistress, assigning them a Power of Attorney, guarantying debts for them, etc. That noise you just heard, by the way, is me screaming across several states and/or continents in terror at the idea of giving Master Gregory space on the deed to your house and the title to your car. Now, there may be an implicit, or even explicit, understanding between the parties that these transfers are only for the purposes of the kink and that they are to be held in trust and respected but people have this really bad tendency of, you know, getting fucking greedy. Which is worrisome to me because, you see, once you put someone on the title of a piece of property or an account, they are a goddamn owner of that account or property and you don’t get to just remove them from it.

“But Boozy,” you may mumble at me through your ballgag, “you just said that people can understand their duty to act in the interests of their financial piss-guzzling worm no matter what.” And sure, that’s true. But let me ask you a question: How many people would you trust with full and complete access to and control of every asset you own, knowing that if you ever said “this is too much for me and I need to end it” and they weren’t ready to stop riding the gravy train, they could just clean your ass out and leave you on the street?

Didn’t think it was that many.

And you may say “Boozy, you could always refuse to do those things. I mean, most people stay firmly aware of their finances in regards to those things and will draw a line,” and I’ll completely agree with you. Which is why it’s worrying that there is a little sub-genre of financial domination that plays out as an extortion/blackmail kink. No shit. This is a thing. There are people within the financial domination community who get off on the idea that they must provide these resources to people or be subject to humiliation. And it isn’t fucking roleplay.

In that sub-genre, the whole thing is based on getting the paypig to do something that is illegal (in the case of a really untrustworthy dominator) or embarrassing (I mean, I guess we could call this the “good” dominator) and provide that proof to the dominating party in the relationship. The dominating party then uses that proof as the basis of their demands for money or property. Now, in a perfect world, when the relationship is terminated that proof would be understood by all parties to be subject to destruction. However, where there is a dominator that, once again, doesn’t want the good times to stop rolling…

You see where I’m going with this. What can start as fantasy blackmail could very easily turn into “Oh, you want out? Well, let me just send your mom this video of you fucking a dog. And the police.”

Why Would Anyone Do That? Why Would Anyone In a Healthy Kink Relationship Demand Something Like That?

To answer the latter first, I would posit the people that are demanding you break the law and provide them with proof so you can be “fantasy blackmailed” aren’t participating in a healthy kink relationship and aren’t really concerned with the emotional, financial, physical, or mental well-being of their subservients and are, indeed, engaging in a form of abuse that takes the “fantasy” out of “subservience fantasy.”

To answer the former…I mean, folks, nobody’s smart when they’re thinking with their fuck organs.

So The Folks Getting Paid Can Be Bad and Get Money With No Downside?

No. Because there definitely is a downside in that people could accuse you, in theory, of, oh…

  1. Fraud;
  2. Duress;
  3. Exploitation of the Elderly/Disabled;
  4. Breach of Professional or Fiduciary Duties;
  5. Actual goddamn blackmail/extortion.

Which, you know, we know has happened at least once.

You Have a Story, Don’t You?

Yep.

See, this specific kink has been the subject of at least one lawsuit, predictably in Florida. In that case, a guy named Abrams sued his financial dominatrix, Goddess Jude. The facts are that the guy had been using her services since a divorce as a typical dominatrix, and that it progressed to a situation of financial dominatrix, with Jude taking control of his financial accounts and even telling him to title his home to her. Which is an extreme, considering she, over time, took roughly half a million dollars in assets from him.

The kicker on it is that, according to the allegations of the 2015 complaint eventually filed by Abrams, Jude had been present at medical appointments where it was disclosed the elderly man was suffering from a mental health issue that impair his judgment, as well as the possibility of dementia and Alzheimers, during the time period. The complaint goes on to allege that after this diagnosis took place, Jude continued to engage in the financial domination relationship, aware that the man on the other side was likely not in full control of his capacities at the time. There were allegations that, when Abrams attempted to end the relationship, Mistress Jude threatened to expose the details of his sordid sex slave for pay lifestyle to his adult children, essentially blackmailing him.

Now, in the interests of fairness, Jude denied all of these claims – even after being sued under a Florida law that alleged her actions amounted to abuse of the elderly by taking financial advantage of him while in a professional relationship of confidence. Which is neat, because the legal theory there was that, as his dominatrix, Jude actually owed professional duties to Abrams and shouldn’t have engaged in jack shit after becoming aware of the alleged mental infirmities. Jude, who, let’s remember, had allegedly taken about half a million dollars, immediately started a crowdfunding campaign to fund her legal defense to the action.

And what happened then?

Well, the case was dismissed. In 2019, the case, having been transferred and after hearings on Motions to Dismiss filed by Jude’s attorneys from 2015-2017, the case was dismissed for a lack of prosecution – meaning that after a certain point Abrams simply decided not to move forward with the matter.

In the meantime, though, and this is really interesting, both Abrams and Goddess Jude were sued as co-defendants in yet another case: that of the homeowner’s insurance seeking a declaratory judgment and the costs expended so far in undertaking to defend Jude from Abrams’s lawsuit! That’s right, the homeowner’s insurance on the (allegedly) stolen home stepped in to see if they needed to defend Goddess Jude because of policy provisions that may require them to provide defense in specific actions so as to protect the value of the real estate.

This case was, eventually, also dismissed for lack of prosecution in 2019.

And while this case didn’t proceed to a full hearing on the facts and the allegations of Abrams remained simply that – unproven allegations – the fact the claim was brought at all shows the legal risks on both sides of the equation for people who may be involved in financial domination arrangements: A risk of abuse on the side of the subservient person, and a risk of liability on the side of the dominant person.

So…

Look, I’m not here to harsh your fuck times, folks. I personally don’t give a shit what two people, both of sound mind, consensually do with their money. But the key factor to this is “consensually.” Financial domination is a kink, and while I don’t get my jollies by paying a libido landlord monthly maybe you do. Like all kinks, though, the exchange of power creates a position of trust between the parties and, in my opinion, confers a duty on the dominant party to rein that shit in when they are aware there are issues present. Likewise, the word “consensually” means that there is, by definition, consent – something that can only be granted by a person that is aware, and which can be revoked at any time.

However, flat out transfers to other folks can’t be revoked. And you can never get back that photo of you banging a grapefruit while dressed like Sailor Moon. And those are the things that worry me in these situations – especially when we consider that there are possible legal instruments and avenues to protect people when they decide to get into this. Trusts, monitored accounts, and other legal mechanisms that require someone to act in your interests and according to your wishes, combined with contracts and enforceable written agreements, can lay the appropriate legal groundwork for you, as a subservient in a financial domination relation, you be protected. So can the regular review of accountings by an independent party. And, yes, I know that kills the fuck vibes you want from one of these situations, but if you know you’re about to go get drunk don’t you stick some cash in your shoe for a cab ride home? It’s the same concept with that, and really anything sexual in nature: play it safe, dipshit.

But you know, that’s really none of my business.

After all, at the end of the day, it’s your goddamn money and your goddamn orgasm.

-BB

If you like Lawyers & Liquor and want to support me, you can toss financial support at the site and its creator on Patreon, through Ko-Fi, or even directly through Paypal! Any help is appreciated, and it keeps me from having to…you know…sell ad space on the site and shit. Want some merch? Check out our Artwork Tee store, or go buy some awesome shirts and mugs over at our Streamlabs Store.